Gait analysis using shoe-worn inertial sensors

Abstract

Spatiotemporal gait analysis with body worn inertial sensors improves diagnosis in clinical practice. Most of the gait performance measures are affected by walking speed. However, it has not been investigated that how much information foot clearance parameters share with the key parameters of gait performance domains. Using shoe-worn inertial sensors and previously validated algorithm we measured spatiotemporal as well as clearance gait parameters in a cohort of able-bodied adults over the age of 65 (N=879). Principal components analysis showed that variability of foot clearance parameters contribute to the main variability in gait data. Moreover, only weak to moderate correlation of gait speed and stride length with some clearance parameters has been observed. We recommend the assessment of clearance parameters during gait analysis in addition to parameters such as gait speed, bearing in mind the importance of foot clearance measures in obstacle negotiation, slipping and tripping related falls.

Physical Behavior in Older Persons during Daily Life: Insights from Instrumented Shoes

“…Instrumented shoes have been used in the past for gait analysis of level walking during locomotion tests in clinical or laboratory environment [ 27 , 34 , 47 , 48 ]. This is, to the best of our knowledge, the first study combining activity monitoring and gait analysis using a single instrumented shoes system in daily life.…”

“…To the best of our knowledge, these parameters have not yet been retrieved in other than clinical or gait lab settings, and never over extended periods such as performed in the current study. There is a major interest in obtaining clearance data from daily life especially since this parameter expresses the highest variance in gait data obtained from elderly subjects [ 47 ]. In the present study, clearance parameters were moderately (HC) and weakly (TC) correlated to stride velocity, a result similar to observations made in laboratory-based gait analysis over 20 m in an age- and health-matched older population [ 49 ].…”